Ukrainian War Developments

Status
Not open for further replies.

Black Shark

Junior Member
By your logic of “war crimes have to be proven” then anything committed by the Ukrainians is null and void; you’re conditionally using evidence if it fits your narrative; I don’t know why you can’t except the fact that the Russian military is equally capable of committing war crimes; which they’ve done extensively.

The whole operation is an illegal war that was grossly underestimated and is costing the Russian economy, people, and image greatly.

I am not a “russophobe” given that I love both the country and its people and culture; me disagreeing with the current situation in Ukraine and pointing out blatant unprofessionalism and violations of international law by its government and military is not me being phobic against the country and it’s people.

Once again I am not Polish and do not understand why you keep bringing that up as an argument when
A. I am not Polish
B. Has no relevancy on the situation
There is nothing here fancy that you can pull - Orc's war crimes have been very well documented over the past 8 years let alone since the military operation started. So far I haven't seen any war crimes committed by Russian soldiers since they have very clear Rules of Engagements as well as how to treat POWs!
If they have done so extensively why is it almost exclusively Ukro-Fascist's war crimes presented as if Russians have done it? Strela-10M driving over a civilian car in center of Kiev that was immediately reported as russian. What about the BMP-2 shooting up civilian car which lacks Z markings? What about the Orc's S-300 missile that malfunctioned and hit a residential building? Immediately the western mass propaganda have said "Putin's missile kill civilians"

If Russian's so massively commit war crimes like they lose tanks, jets, helicopters then the Orcs would not need to pose their own atrocities and loses of military vehicles as russian. :D

You did not point anything so far but have made claims with strict Orc propaganda sources. I am still waiting for the factual provable or proven atrocities of russians. Wasching Maschines and actors playing dead are certainly not convincing enough. We have very strict RoE which showed professionalism unseen to any war historian today for entire humanity! Where your enemy values the lives of your citizens more than your president or its military!
 
Last edited:

Richard Santos

Captain
Registered Member
There wasn't any bigger troop movement in Ukraine, the units stay where they were at the begining of the conflict.

If they use more units then the current state could be different, but in that case the USA could be fancy to send few thousand polish and german to Belorus and Kaliningrad, just to check how far they can go.

That’s because the Russians apparently didn’t have enough strategic reserve, and their engaged units could not make a break through and are stuck in place.

So they need to acknowledge the 5 front attack totally failed, and now they need to find ways to pull forces out of the most hopeless of the 5 fronts so they can create some strategic reserve to create some maneuvering capability elsewhere
 

Richard Santos

Captain
Registered Member
Could they move reserves ?


I haven't seen any trop movement on the Urkainan side.


As far as we know every unit just stay where they are. Considering Russia monitoroing all areas, and has airforce it is asensible strategy.

What’s stopping them? If the Russians begin to make better progress on one of their 5 fronts, can the Ukrainians shift units to meet it? We don’t know because the Russians aren’t making good enough progress to be really threatening on any of the 5 fronts. So the Ukrainians don’t really even need to move forces.
 

pmc

Major
Registered Member
No, they were not successful in an strategic or operational sense in any of them. They had some tactical success in the south, which is not the same thing.

To be successful from a operational perspective, they have to break through into Ukrainian hinterland and cause the collapse of Ukrainian war effort by preventing Ukraine from moving reserve from one front to another.
where you evidence that ukraine is not collapse state?. It is just Russia does not have manpower to manage it yet.
As i said foreigners have moved out. there is not much fuel storage or factory production as i said this multi-axis format went after land. that decrease farm production. even new arms whether ATGM or SAMs needs to be imported. there was never reserve to even fight for a month.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Richard Santos

Captain
Registered Member
where you evidence that ukraine is not collapse state?. It is just Russia does not have manpower to manage it yet.
As i said foreigners have moved out. there is not much fuel storage or factory production as i said this multi-axis format went after land. that decrease farm production. even new arms whether ATGM or SAMs needs to be imported. there was never reserve to even fight for a month.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
They have not collapsed yet. The Russians are already using requisitioned pickup trucks as combat vehicles.

There certainly does not appear to be sizeable Russian maneuvering forces able to exploit deep opening in Ukrainian line still available. It appears to me that given Russia performance hithetto that confirms the weakness and limitation of the their battalion tactical group doctrine, Russians would actually need to do some significant emergency on the spot reorganization of the their fundamental deployable tactical unit, and then some very rapid emergency de-programming and then re-indoctrination of their low to mid level officers to make their operational maneuvering force effective even if they had the strategic reserve units and are able to open up the opportunity to use them.
 
Last edited:

Bill Blazo

Junior Member
Registered Member
As the old cliché goes, every general wants to fight the last war. And this war will be the last once the next one hits. I think it's premature to draw any conclusions about a conventional NATO-Russia fight on the basis of this war or other recent wars fought by the United States. That's because Russia has already learned fundamental lessons from its numerous mistakes in this war, so it's unlikely to repeat many of them in the next one. The reason why Russia's next war won't be a disaster is precisely because this one was. Hitler thought the Soviet Union would easily crumble after seeing the early results of the Winter War. His miscalculation turned out to be fatal; the Soviet Union was the main reason why Nazi Germany collapsed. Likewise, the fact that America was able to deliver "shock and awe" against Iraq in 2003 is absolutely irrelevant for this discussion. Iraq was an internally divided basket-case with a tin-pot dictator. The Iraqi military simply couldn't and didn't offer any serious resistance against the American attack. By contrast, Ukraine's conventional military was a behemoth before this war, and rising Ukrainian nationalism always ensured there would be a popular war against Russian encroachment. The last time America fought a serious opponent was in Vietnam, and it lost. The last time China fought a serious opponent was also Vietnam in 1979. We're talking decades ago here. This is the first major conventional peer-to-peer war in decades, at least among two large militaries (so I'm excluding wars like Armenia and Azerbaijan, Congo and Rwanda, etc). There will be many lessons that come out of it for all sides. And there’s another cliché worth remembering: Russia is never as strong as she looks, but never as weak as she looks either.
 

GodRektsNoobs

Junior Member
Registered Member
Western army would never consider a 5 axis attack, and would consider such a move wrongheaded.

To understand why the western army would not want to do it while the Russian army would, it has to be understood western and Russian armies generally has a different operational ideology, for the lack of better word.

Soviet operational doctrine since around 1943 has emphasize opening at battle with a style of practical military deception operation called moskirovka. Moskirovka presumes Soviet forces had numerical superiority. It emphasizes setting the stage for the main decisive attack by first simultaneously attacking the enemy along multiple widely separated axis that makes it difficult for the enemy to know where the main attack axis lay, and also makes it difficult for the enemy to be able to position its reserves so as to be able to advantageously meet Russian attacks on several axis at once. This forces the enemy to guess which axis is the main one, and commit their reserves prematurely. Only when it becomes clear where the enemy has committed their reserves, would Russian select the primary axis of attack to avoid enemy reserves. The Russian army would then commit its own reserve to achieve a breakthrough by effectively push against an unlocked door. During the late 1943-1945 period, the Soviets implemented moskirovka with tremendous success against the German army. Despite later soviet portrayals of great soviet heroics in beating the german army, the Soviets didn’t do much out fight the Germans as out deceived and out maneuvered the German army.

Moskirovka remained an integral part of soviet operating doctrine through the Cold War.

It looks very much to me like the Russians in the current Ukrainian war also attempted to implement a version of moskirovka. The problem is the Russians didn’t start the battle with any numerical superiority. So the Ukrainians were able to check each of Russia advances and stop all of them from making decisive breakthroughs. If the Russians had done it right, then Russians would attack with so much force that each of its 5 attack axis could potentially break through into Ukrainian hinterland, and Ukraine must gather the balk of its reserve to meet any single one of them. Once the Ukrainians have committed to meeting a single one, the Russians would then throw in their own reserves into an attack that the Ukraine did not deploy their reserves to meet, and break through. They obviously failed.

Western military thinking says advantage of concentration of force outweigh any advantage in deception resulting from dispersal of forces. So western military strategy would looks for 1, at most 2 main axis of attack, and strive to achieve overwhelming superiority at the single or at most two points of attack. Western concept of military deception does not emphasize actually going through the motions of attacking at different locations similar to soviet Moskirovka. Instead it emphasize deception before the battle through camouflage, false signals, False units etc. Deception during the battle would be achieved by depriving the enemy of situational awareness by destroying their surveillance assets such as reconnaissance planes, and then maneuver the main attacking units in unexpected ways so as to attack along axis the enemy did not come to expect based on pre-attack intelligence.

So you are right, the western army would not attempt to attack in 5 direction at once. They would consider that a serious breach of fundamental military principle of concentration of force.

Russians did attack in 5 directions at once as they have their own idea of fundamental military principles that had worked many times before. But they clearly did not make sure the circumstance that made such maneuver succeed before is duplicated in Ukraine before they tried.
Not only that, you also have to remember that Ukrainians when to Frunze too and have Russian tactics all figured out. They came from a single united country afterall.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top